Does a hotspot need a proxy cache?

From: Rod-Lists 
And if so what would be your choice, Varnish or nginx?

=============================================================== From: Bret McHone ------------------------------------------------------ With our network I ended up turning the cache off with our barracuda web filter. We weren't hitting our full internet usage and I found that with if enabled people would occasionally get errors when going to a site that was in cache. As a side note, I will never purchase another barracuda product after my last experience with their tech support.... -Bret

=============================================================== From: Dave Brockman ------------------------------------------------------ -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 Reverse proxy or caching proxy server? I could potentially see why you might want to use a caching proxy server on a hot spot (assuming it's a hotspot serving clients), but unless you are standing up a server off of the hotspot, I fail to see how a reverse proxy (Varnish) would do you any good.... Regards, dtb -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v2.0.17 (MingW32) Comment: Using GnuPG with Thunderbird - iQEcBAEBAgAGBQJR8R1eAAoJEMP+wtEOVbcdq5AH/30a+vzO/QYgH/eZiog8kJCV zEXeSWwFu9TG08XY3Fh44YpMNHuHnEmXf0JoR+zrucClBVb2NfJu317O8s0Fy3q6 GWHtLG1yiPW4SisNtagg+NoViJZL3aP+iH2kIaeF2rqsQ0gCdjqwx15aQjy5BoS9 7ddJFWBzzzVloVkxCqg+ma6ZmLNgl7HqWHpb88q3KJVruML4Or9xkxaQK5uA01Ap FZcVRopnSHj+FieLt3WbLYWwTmz2SjQ3HZzlcx2YtJjc+bGL+VsPRNbV5cpLo13r PF6UbOOkWfYWVYQj75haQhMu8Dg2osrOATH4bqv8gb5r/WkiJF7bgYrRQ28Qz9I= =lqUQ -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

=============================================================== From: Mike Harrison ------------------------------------------------------ Wrong kind of cache.. Think Squid or Polipo A proxy with fast cache can effectively speed up an overloaded connection, and add some filtering, protection and other things. I've had good luck with Polipo as a light use proxy. Simpler than Squid.

=============================================================== From: Lee Walker ------------------------------------------------------ nginx is a web server (with some of its own caching) varnish is a reverse proxy lookup cache, i.e. it sits in front of your web server, and makes a lot of requests never even hit the webserver - varnish deals with them fully, so no hit to your web sever and no hits to your DB. Makes things very fast. For a lot of sites that do dynamic content per user, it's less useful (or not at all), but Varnish now has ESI (Edge Side Includes) where it will only ask for the pieces that have dynamic content from your web server, and assemble the page from varnish cached pieces and dynamic pieces from your web server. I've not played with ESI much yet, but looking at it. I'm doing a lot of varnish work right now for a couple of clients. To answer your question, nginx or varnish?, the answer is both :D Varnish proxy cache in front of your nginx web server.

=============================================================== From: ------------------------------------------------------ Varnish and nginx are normally used to speed up the display of static content, they're normally deployed on the backend of the server you're trying to reach, not on behalf of the client making the request. For a hotspot, you're looking more at a caching proxy server like Squid. Personally, I don't view caching proxies as being worth it from a performance standpoint anymore. Too much content is dynamic, so you'll be missing cache hits often. From a security standpoint, it's a different story. Having a single choke point for access control does make administration simpler, as long as that point isn't causing a bottleneck. -----Original Message----- From: [] On Behalf Of Rod-Lists Sent: Thursday, July 25, 2013 8:19 AM To: Chattanooga Unix Gnu Android Linux Users Group Subject: [Chugalug] Does a hotspot need a proxy cache? And if so what would be your choice, Varnish or nginx?